[ { "id": 204991, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1965", "page_number": 99, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "90\n\nS. HUANG\n\nIn June 1961 the University Preparatory Committee, chaired by the Hon. C. Y. Kwan, was appointed. Its terms of reference were to advise on a site for the central university buildings and the accommodation required. In due course a site in the upper Shatin Valley, not too far from Chung Chi College, was selected and Government was persuaded to set aside 250 acres there for the new University.\n\nFinally, in May 1962, Government, satisfied with the progress made on all fronts, announced the appointment of a commission to make recommendations on the establishment of the University. The Commission was a distinguished group of men, and credit for bringing them together must go to the Inter-University Council for Higher Education Overseas in England, in particular to Sir Charles Morris, Chairman of the Council, and to Sir Christopher Cox.\n\nThe Commission Chairman was Mr. J. S. Fulton (now Sir J. S. Fulton), who has been mentioned earlier. The other members were Dr. Choh-Ming Li (now first Vice-Chancellor of the Chinese University), Professor of Business Administration and Director of the Centre for Chinese Studies at the University of California, Dr. J. V. Loach, Registrar of the University of Leeds, Professor Thong Saw-pak, Professor of Physics at the University of Malaya, and Professor F. C. Young, Professor of Biochemistry at the University of Cambridge. Mr. I. C. M. Maxwell, Secretary of the Inter-University Council for Higher Education Overseas, joined the group as Secretary. The Commission came to Hong Kong that summer and before its departure publicly announced that in their view the three Post-Secondary Grant Colleges were ready for university status. They took it that their job was to make recommendations on the organization and constitution of the University.\n\nIn April 1963 their eagerly awaited report was published and was received with general enthusiasm. Shortly thereafter, Government announced that it had approved the Commission's recommendations in principle, as had the Colleges. In June the formation of a Provisional Council was announced; and on July 2, 1963 with the completion of necessary preliminary work, which was considerable, the process of preparing the way for the establishment of the University began.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205414, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1967", "page_number": 176, "title": "RAS-1967", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n169\n\nNOTES\n\nI am most grateful to Mr. Yuen Chun-fang, Liaison Officer, Secretariat for Chinese Affairs for help with the interviews which yielded part of the information given above.\n\n1 Reports on the Past and Present State of Her Majesty's Colonial Possessions, 1845 (London, W. Clowes & Sons, for H.M.S.O., 1846) p. 147 and the same for 1846, p. 230.\n\n2 G. R. Sayer, Hong Kong, Birth Adolescence and Coming of Age (Oxford, University Press, 1937) p. 208, quoting from the Canton Press, February 1842.\n\n3 Sayer, p. 91.\n\n4 Sayer, p. 30.\n\n5 A. R. Johnston (H.M. Deputy Superintendent of Trade) \"Note on the Island of Hong Kong\" first published in the London Geographical Journal Vol. XIV, and reprinted in the Hong Kong Almanack and Directory for 1846.\n\n6 Hong Kong Government Gazette for 28 March 1857 p. 4, Table No. 4.\n\n7 The Last Year in China......by a Field Officer actually employed in that Country. 2nd edition (London, Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1843) p. 75.\n\n8 K. S. MacKenzie, Narrative of the Second Campaign in China (London, R. Bentley, 1842) p. 160.\n\n9 See Hong Kong Administrative Reports for 1934, 1935 and 1936 at pp. Q.86, Q.84 and Q.81 respectively.\n\n10 This information, like any other for which no specific source is quoted, comes from Mr. CHOW Chik-san of Kau Wai, aged 77 and Madam CHAN CHOW Ping of San Wai, aged 81.\n\n11 Rev. W. Lobscheidt, A Few Notices on the Extent of Chinese Education and the Government Schools of Hong Kong (Hong Kong, China Mail office, 1859).\n\n12 See Summary of Report of Squatters Commission 1891-1906, pp. 97-103.\n\nThis volume of MSS. is kept in the Library, Colonial Secretariat, Hong Kong.\n\n13 For accounts of Cantonese and Hakka see J. Dyer Ball, Things Chinese (Hong Kong etc., Kelly and Walsh Ltd., 4th edition, 1903) pp. 202, 211 and 323-326.\n\n14 LO Hsiang-lin and others, Hong Kong and its External Communications before 1842 (Hong Kong, Institute of Chinese Culture, 1963) pp. 80-88. This is the English translation of the text, but not the notes, of their work published in Hong Kong in 1959.\n\n15 This information is taken from the accounts given at p. 5 of Prof. Woo Sing-lim's The Prominent Chinese in Hong Kong (Hong Kong, The Five Continents Book Co., 26th year of the Chinese Republic, 1937) published in Chinese and English and at pp. 578-579, under the name CHOW Cheong-ling, of Present Day Impressions of the Far East and Prominent and Progressive Chinese at Home and Abroad, published in London, Shanghai etc. by The Globe Encyclopedia Company, 1917.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207735, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1976", "page_number": 123, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "108\n\nTIN-YUKE CHAR\n\nTo identify Li Sun's name as written in Chinese characters and to gather more information on this interesting person, a letter was written to Hamilton College on April 8, 1975. A reply from the President's office said, “A search of our records revealed that Li Sun (listed as Chan Lai Sun in our files) attended Hamilton College for two years, in 1846-48. He was awarded the honorary degree of Master of Arts during his visit to the College in 1873 [as a member of the Chinese Educational Mission].\" Frank K. Lorenz, Reference Librarian at Hamilton, also wrote, \"Unfortunately we cannot determine what Chan's full name was in Chinese. We have a dozen letters from him, under the letter head of the Chinese Educational Commission, but they are entirely in English (very fluent and colloquial English at that) and are all signed \"Chan Laisun.\"\n\nThus began the search for Chan Laisun's name in Chinese.\n\nYung Wing, a commissioner of the Chinese Educational Mission in 1873 made this report: \"The educational commission was to consist of two commissioners, Chin [Ch'en] Lan Pin [  ] and myself. Chin Lan Pin's duty was to see that the students keep up their knowledge of Chinese while in America; my duty was to look after their foreign education and to find suitable homes for them. Chin Lan Pin and myself were to look after their expenses conjointly. Two Chinese teachers were provided to keep up their studies in Chinese, and an interpreter was provided for the Commission. Yeh Shu Tung [***] and Yung Yune Foo [***] were the Chinese teachers and Tsang Lai Sun was the interpreter.” He was most likely selected because he had been educated in English and was familiar with the Chinese dialects of the Southern maritime provinces from where most of the students were chosen by Yung Wing who was himself from the Heung Shan (now Chung Shan) district of Kwangtung.\n\nTsang Lai Sun was identified with the Chinese characters 曾蘭生 (Tseng Lan-sheng in kuo-yu pronunciation) in the Chinese translation of Yung Wing's book. Thus, it appears that this Tsang Lai Sun was the same person as Chan Lai Sun as listed in Hamilton College records and also Li Sun who met the Hawaiian King.\n\nChan wrote in a letter to Professor Edward North of Springfield, Massachusetts, that he would be enclosing a family photograph about which Mr. Lorenz wrote on July 30, 1976, “..\n\nwe cannot", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211034, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 95, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "70\n\n32\n\nFor further details and comments about the establishment and failure of the 1881-1883 Normal School, see CO129/197, p. 326f. In this file, Colonial Office minutes are critical of Hennessy's extravagance, note that \"the scheme is evidently Dr. Eitel's with Governor Hennessy's fiat\" and other correspondence (e.g., Eitel first report on the Normal School, in Eitel to M.S. Tonnochy, Acting Colonial Secretary, 19th January, 1882, and his second report enclosed in his letter to Tonnochy of 19th January, 1882) shows that Eitel, the Inspector of Schools, felt that there would be very unfortunate repercussions if the school were to be closed and that the headmaster, A.J. May was even prepared to take a salary reduction (from the original proposal of $2,400 a year to $1,600) rather than see the Normal School break up. In later reports (contained in CO129/202 p. 532f.), Eitel compared the Normal School, with its \"special private tuition and instruction\" in pedagogy, to the pupil-teacher scheme at the Central School to the disadvantage of the latter, and May, in his letter to Frederick Stewart of 19th July, 1883, mentioned the virtues of being able to utilize simulation techniques for the preparation of teachers at the Normal School. The actual end of the Normal School, which had been dismissed as unnecessary in the Education Commission Report of September 1882, was precipitated by A.J. May's insistence, in September 1883, that the students agreed to a bond to teach for five years at a salary rate of $25 per month on their completion of the course. The immediate result was that four of the ten students left for the Medical College at Tientsin, three joined commercial firms, and one became a government interpreter, leaving only two of the original intake, as mentioned above, to become teachers.\n\n33\n\nIn Singapore, a central training college for men teachers using English as the medium of instruction was proposed in 1904 and again in 1910, but the scheme was aborted because of the lack of applications. In Kuala Lumpur, an experimental teacher training course began in 1905, proved successful, and was followed by a two-year course in Penang in 1907. See Wong Hoy Kee, Francis, and Gwee Yee Hean, Perspectives: The Development of Education in Malaysia and Singapore (Kuala Lumpur: Heinemann Educational Books (Asia) Ltd., 1972), pp. 12-14.\n\n34\n\nWhat is certain is that his name does not appear in the Blue Book as one of the Pupil Teachers at the Central School at any time between 1880 and 1885. As noted above, Mok Man Cheung won the Class 1 Mathematics prize in January 1884. He was employed as \"Fourth Chinese Assistant\" at the Central School from September 1884. He did not, therefore, have the time to be enrolled in a pupil teacher's course, which customarily lasted for three years, but he might have taken an examination in \"Pupil-Teacher's Theory\" while studying in Class 1.\n\n35\n\nThe dispute over the opening hours at the City Hall Museum had come to a head in 1880 when the Executive Committee of the City Hall Museum, led by its chairman, William Keswick, attempted to restrict the entry of Chinese to the afternoons. They were opposed by the first Chinese member of the Legislative Council, Ng Choy, and by the Governor, Sir John Pope Hennessy. See CO129/189 p. 476-614 for correspondence, largely unsympathetic to the Committee's discriminatory proposal and including an extract from the Hong Kong Hansard for 1880 reporting a speech by Ng Choy, and CO129/192 p. 438-446 for correspondence which includes Keswick's opinion that racial distinctions should not be abolished with regard to admission to the Museum of the City Hall. The call for separate schools for the different races had been made on a number of occasions in the past, most notably in 1845, 1856, and 1870-1872, but the most recent resurgence of interest and argument about the issue had been provoked by a speech made by the Anglican Bishop Hoare at the Prize Distribution of the Diocesan Boys' School in January", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211367, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1988", "page_number": 83, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "59\n\nbeen thrown out by the Legislative Council and whether it was to be reconsidered. The questioner did not realise that the proposal had never come before the Legislative Council but had only been under consideration in the Executive Council.\n\nIn reply to the question the Government spokesman said the matter had been under consideration by the Colonial Government and the Governor was to be asked what measures, if any, were contemplated.\n\nA comment for the information of the Under-Secretary minuted on a Colonial Office Despatch contained the following history of the progress of the Sanitary Board's recommendation through the Executive Council. In June 1919 the Executive Council in Hong Kong had considered the proposals of the Sanitary Board but had postponed the matter. The next week it asked the Sanitary Board to supply statistics relating to the classes of work in which children were employed and the hours of work. This report was considered on 24 July, but the Colonial Secretary had concluded that if the education problem were solved, then the child labour problem would solve itself. Though the Executive Council side-stepped the problem, pressure for action was continued by interested groups. At the end of December the Council proposed appointing a Commission to enquire into the conditions of the industrial employment of children and to advise as to the desirability and feasibility of legislation. But as the agitation died down the Executive Council in March 1920 decided to postpone the appointment of the Commission.\n\nProposals passed at a Church of England Men's Society Meeting February 1921\n\nThe example Hong Kong could set for China was a theme which ran through the discussions on child labour laws. When Mr. Bowley again addressed the Church of England Men's Society on the subject in February 1921, he took up the theme. “Our Colony is in a unique position as an outpost of Western civilization on the fringe of one of the oldest civilizations of the world, and, if we are to justify our boast that Western civilization is the better, it behooves us to look carefully at the conditions of our own community.' \n\nIt must be noted, however, that he had preceded this by a reference", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211373, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1988", "page_number": 89, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "65\n\ndesirable to cut down on the hours of labour done by children, there was a limit to what could be done if the children were not to be worse off after legislation than before. To restrict labour would mean cutting down the income of families that already were at subsistence level.\n\nExcept in a very few cases, he did not believe there was sweated labour in Hong Kong. He admitted \"the work is hard... but where it constitutes the alternative to starvation it should be allowed\". The children working in China were mostly worse off than those in Hong Kong and for this reason the Commission did not recommend the total prohibition of work by children.\n\nHe claimed that to institute compulsory education would attract millions from China. Mr. Chow might have been asked why so many children should come to Hong Kong for education if their lot was so much worse in China and their labour was needed to keep the family from starvation. As an alternative to compulsory education, Mr. Chow suggested voluntary attendance at evening or Sunday classes.\n\nAn editorial in the China Mail on the Commission's Report stated that registration, inspection and compulsion would only add to the sufferings of the children, not alleviate them. It took a racial line and recommended that when child labour had been permitted for or on behalf of Europeans a heavier penalty should be imposed than in similar cases among the Chinese. Rather presumptuously he added, \"We at least should get our hands clean first\". The editor's negative critique was concluded with the statement that, \"It is clear the Commission asks for more than the Government is likely to undertake\".\n\n19\n\nThe Hong Kong Telegraph expressed shock at the state of affairs: \"In many respects it is no exaggeration to say that the inquiry revealed conditions nothing less than appalling\". In its view the recommendations proposed by the Commission were “a good start upon a very difficult problem”.\n\nThe Child Labour Ordinance enacted\n\n--\n\nSeptember 1922\n\nAnother year passed before the \"Ordinance to regulate the employment of Children in certain Industries\" had its first reading in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 } ]